November 7 , 2024, Oral Arguments
Olson vs. Mid-Century Ins. Co.
Las Vegas – 11:30 a.m. – Full Court
In RE: Pub. Records Request to Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t
Las Vegas – 1:30 p.m. – Full Court
Olson vs. Mid-Century Ins. Co.
Docket No. 86892
Las Vegas – 11:30 a.m. – Full Court
Appellant/cross-respondent Layne Olson, on behalf of Elizabeth MacFetridge, sued respondents/cross-appellants Mid-Century Insurance company, Farmers Group, Inc., and Farmers Insurance Exchange (collectively MIC) for insurance bad faith, unfair insurance practices, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and related claims after the insurance companies refused to defend McFetridge in a personal injury accident brought by Olson. A jury found respondents liable for breach of contract and unfair insurance practices but found in favor of MIC on the remaining claims. The jury awarded a total of $142,500 in compensatory damages after finding that McFetridge breached her duty to mitigate damages and awarded a total of $1,500,000 in punitive damages. Olson appeals, arguing that much of the jury’s verdict must be reversed or, alternatively, that a new trial is required, and that the district court improperly declined to award post-offer interest on the punitive damages award. MIC cross-appeals, arguing that the district court erred in its calculation of compensatory and punitive damages and that it is entitled to summary judgment on the breach of contract claims.
In RE: Pub. Records Request to Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t
Docket No. 85598
Las Vegas – 1:30 p.m. – Full Court
This is an appeal and cross appeal from a district court order dismissing a petition for judicial confirmation and denying a motion to amend to add a claim for declaratory relief. The litigation arises out of requests under Nevada’s public records act, NRS Ch. 239 (NPRA). The question presented is whether the right of action NRS 239.011 provides to requesters of public records precludes the government agency from suing for judicial confirmation or declaratory relief when multiple parties assert competing interests in public records. This is an issue of statutory interpretation that has divided courts elsewhere. Compare, e.g., Filarsky v. Superior Court, 49 P.3d 194 (Cal. 2002) (holding that the California Public Records Act prohibits a governmental entity from seeking a declaratory judgment against a requestor of information) with City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351 (Tex. 2000) (holding that the version of the Texas Public Records Act at issue did not prohibit a governmental entity from seeking a declaratory judgment against a requestor of information).